BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

I don’t understand what the constitutional point is?

Ref was advisory and not binding - end of.

Advisory referendum led to a binding piece of constitutional legislation. Lib Dems want to repeal that legislation without a referendum advisory or not.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I don’t understand what the constitutional point is?

Ref was advisory and not binding - end of.

Advisory referendum led to a binding piece of constitutional legislation. Lib Dems want to repeal that legislation without a referendum advisory or not.

Ref wasn’t on the legislation so fairly moot.

If Lib Dem’s win a majority on a no Brexit mandate, given how much swing there would need to be, it’d be pretty hard to say they didn’t have legitimacy to do so; though it’s moot anyway as it won’t happen

Alejandrosdog

darkhairedlord wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

darkhairedlord wrote:

Genuine Question,
If we leave without a deal, will all the lorry drivers get turned back for not having a Visa?

It is a (remote) possibility

As I understand it, no.

This is because of the temporary No Deal arrangement put in place by the EU

A lorry can leave the UK and can deliver goods to the EU destination but it can't make collections and deliveries when it's there.

Is this reciprocated the other way?
I can see why the hauliers are screwed.

Its a major problem for them, the bigger hauliers have teams and resources the smaller ones less. I predict mayhem

darkhairedlord

Alejandrosdog wrote:

darkhairedlord wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

darkhairedlord wrote:

Genuine Question,
If we leave without a deal, will all the lorry drivers get turned back for not having a Visa?

It is a (remote) possibility

As I understand it, no.

This is because of the temporary No Deal arrangement put in place by the EU

A lorry can leave the UK and can deliver goods to the EU destination but it can't make collections and deliveries when it's there.

Is this reciprocated the other way?
I can see why the hauliers are screwed.

Its a major problem for them, the bigger hauliers have teams and resources the smaller ones less. I predict mayhem

A lot of the large hauliers sub out to Latvian* hauliers that employ Latvians on latvian wages but work in the UK. They wont be able to work under those circumstances and we will be short of drivers and trucks, even for domestic carriage.
You can see why uk drivers voted out.

*other nationalities also apply.

shirley_basso

^ in this case a wholly respectable decision and all the power to them. Begrudgingly
Although they may find the work available is much reduced so salaries remain depressed.

darkhairedlord

Shirley Basso wrote:

^ in this case a wholly respectable decision and all the power to them. Begrudgingly
Although they may find the work available is much reduced so salaries remain depressed.

It's a similar story across many industries, migrants will come in and take low paid work that should and would pay more.

shirley_basso

I know RC has regularly posted research that immigration doesn't suppress wages which does read as highly credible but it just does not make logical sense.

Pross

darkhairedlord wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

^ in this case a wholly respectable decision and all the power to them. Begrudgingly
Although they may find the work available is much reduced so salaries remain depressed.

It's a similar story across many industries, migrants will come in and take low paid work that should and would pay more.

I'm not convinced by that. In a lot of cases, agriculture being an obvious one, the issue is more that immigrant labour is needed as Brits don't like doing it (understandably as it is hard work, long hours and often seasonal). The care sector is another quite heavily reliant on EU and other immigrant labour. Even if Brits are prepared to fill in at the expense of better wages where is that money coming from? In agriculture food prices will have to rise, in the care sector the companies providing care on behalf of local authorities are already cut to the bone.

TheBigBean

Shirley Basso wrote:

I know RC has regularly posted research that immigration doesn't suppress wages which does read as highly credible but it just does not make logical sense.

The bank of england produced a report that supports wage suppression in the unskilled sector. They increased in the skilled sector, and overall the average increased.

darkhairedlord

Whether migration does or doesn't suppress wages. it's how it feels when you do two jobs and still have to claim benefits, thats what makes people think it does.
Anyway, brexiteers are so thick on here none of them are yet to provide any benefits from leaving.

tailwindhome

TheBigBean wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Daddylonglegs wrote:

For me the Lib Dem's revocation policy is a democratic outrage whichever side of the fence you stand.

Talk me through this.

Referendum in the 70s fought on more or less the same lines, results in “in”.

So at what point was the campaign for out no longer anti democratic - where’s the line?

And what part of democracy does it say that you can’t express your view and campaign on it?

Do you think the SNP should declare independence for Scotland? After all, it is their stated aim, and they do have the most seats.

Constitutional matters, especially should be done by referendums.

I don’t know the ins and outs of Scotland so I don’t really know.

I do know the Brexit ref was advisory and is not really compatible with representative democracy set ups.

Would you say that the Scottish separatists are being undemocratic for continuing to campaign?

It is perfectly democratic for the SNP to continue to campaign for independence via another referendum which is what they do. It would be undemocractic for them to unilaterally declare independence solely based on having the most MPs.

In other words, Lib Dems should campaign for remaining via another referendum, not simply by winning enough seats. Still, there aren't enough principled voters who care about this sort of thing, so presumably it is a cheap vote winning policy that they won't need to enact.

I disagree.
It wouldn't be undemocratic, whether or not it would have any legal effect is another thing.

I suppose the issue is whether you believe governments can change the constitution or whether that is something reserved for the people. Maybe undemocratic is not the right word - constitutional outrage is in vogue at the moment, so maybe that's better.

Would the Scottish Nats declaring independence be a constitutional anything?

tailwindhome

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

robert88

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

How splendid.

There is clearly very little more that needs to be done.

surrey_commuter

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Three years ago I would have thought we were gaming the situation, now I am in despair at how far we have fallen

morstar

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Three years ago I would have thought we were gaming the situation, now I am in despair at how far we have fallen

That is like when you hand in your homework in thinking you've done what you needed to...

Only to receive a damning critique that demonstrates you clearly had no idea what was required.

Reading between the lines, it does scream 'we're going for no deal, please help us with that', and the reply says, 'we really have tried to help you, but we can't unless you can tell us what it is you actually want (but please, not the same stuff we've already ruled out multiple times)'.

john80

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Looks a bit more like screw you uk.

bianchimoon

Alejandrosdog wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

I do like the irony of Brexiteers going on about the SNP wanting independence.

The SNP need to swallow their pride and make it a UK wide referendum. Repaint the bus and romp home.

A perfect example.
Should the entire EU be given a vote on Brexit?

No, only children. Apparently it affects them mmore, theyre more important and able to make more balanced decisions.

That
sweedish **** cross eyed kid says so

If that was supposed to be humour, it was sh*t if it was you being as you are, I pity your offspring

orraloon

bianchimoon wrote:

Alejandrosdog wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

I do like the irony of Brexiteers going on about the SNP wanting independence.

The SNP need to swallow their pride and make it a UK wide referendum. Repaint the bus and romp home.

A perfect example.
Should the entire EU be given a vote on Brexit?

No, only children. Apparently it affects them mmore, theyre more important and able to make more balanced decisions.

That
sweedish **** cross eyed kid says so

If that was supposed to be humour, it was sh*t if it was you being as you are, I pity your offspring

Check the time stamp of the post. Been in 'Spoons all day so well trollied by then.

briantrumpet

morstar wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Three years ago I would have thought we were gaming the situation, now I am in despair at how far we have fallen

That is like when you hand in your homework in thinking you've done what you needed to...

Only to receive a damning critique that demonstrates you clearly had no idea what was required.

Reading between the lines, it does scream 'we're going for no deal, please help us with that', and the reply says, 'we really have tried to help you, but we can't unless you can tell us what it is you actually want (but please, not the same stuff we've already ruled out multiple times)'.

And reading Barclay's letter, it reads to me rather as a mix of arrogance and ignorance. I'm not sure who he thinks his audience is.

cruff

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour. My industry (IT Security) suffers from it as much as any other industry - although admittedly we're generally paid a bit better than the average Starbucks worker, but this just makes it more advantageous for employers to lie about a 'lack of skills' and employ someone from the subcontinent for half what they would a British (or, indeed, Eastern European) professional. Its part of the system - don't like it, attack the system, not the people in it. Personally, I'm good at my job, so am pretty sure I'll always be OK (until they find a way for AI to do it) - but even I can see divide and rule at play here.

It's the same old story as its always been: When the people are p1ssed off, those on charge blame the brown people (or in the case of Brexit, the slightly less white people)

surrey_commuter

john80 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Looks a bit more like screw you uk.

Really? Seemed to be very politely pointing out that all the things Barclay want are in the WA.

No wonder our clowns are happy with no deal as they believe it entails side deals and a transition period to stop any bad stuff

morstar

briantrumpet wrote:

morstar wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Exchange of letters on UK EU no deal prep

Barclay

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Barnier

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... arclay.pdf

Three years ago I would have thought we were gaming the situation, now I am in despair at how far we have fallen

That is like when you hand in your homework in thinking you've done what you needed to...

Only to receive a damning critique that demonstrates you clearly had no idea what was required.

Reading between the lines, it does scream 'we're going for no deal, please help us with that', and the reply says, 'we really have tried to help you, but we can't unless you can tell us what it is you actually want (but please, not the same stuff we've already ruled out multiple times)'.

And reading Barclay's letter, it reads to me rather as a mix of arrogance and ignorance. I'm not sure who he thinks his audience is.

I think the audience is the UK. It is designed to be filed in the evidence cabinet for the EU won't budge blame narrative.
If you read the entirety of both letters, it doesn't support that narrative but a nice bit of selective quoting and it works nicely.

Alejandrosdog

lets get out and get on with it.

Alejandrosdog

The eu line give us a plan that we can accept is bull shit . They refuse to say what they would accept other than that which is unacceptable.

rick_chasey

Alejandrosdog wrote:

The eu line give us a plan that we can accept is bull shoot . They refuse to say what they would accept other than that which is unacceptable.

They have you just haven’t been paying attention.

Bit like when you thought Parliament voted for no deal.

coopster_the_1st

Cruff wrote:

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour. My industry (IT Security) suffers from it as much as any other industry - although admittedly we're generally paid a bit better than the average Starbucks worker, but this just makes it more advantageous for employers to lie about a 'lack of skills' and employ someone from the subcontinent for half what they would a British (or, indeed, Eastern European) professional. Its part of the system - don't like it, attack the system, not the people in it. Personally, I'm good at my job, so am pretty sure I'll always be OK (until they find a way for AI to do it) - but even I can see divide and rule at play here.

It's the same old story as its always been: When the people are p1ssed off, those on charge blame the brown people (or in the case of Brexit, the slightly less white people)

Cr@p rant and still after 3 years you don't understand why the UK voted to leave so let me educate you!

See the part in bold. That's why we voted to leave as we didn't like the system. The UK voted to move control of all immigration from Brussels and back to the UK. Thus Taking back control

Stevo_666

Cruff wrote:

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour.

It's just the impact of supply and demand in the labour market. If you're an employer and someone from the EU is willing to do the job for less than what you might normally have to pay (and they are as capable of doing the job as other applicants), what would you do?

Alejandrosdog

Stevo 666 wrote:

Cruff wrote:

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour.

It's just the impact of supply and demand in the labour market. If you're an employer and someone from the EU is willing to do the job for less than what you might normally have to pay (and they are as capable of doing the job as other applicants), what would you do?

As an employer i treat all eu citizens including british as equal. I discriminate against all others in favour of eu citizens.

Once weve left i will reconsider this position

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Cruff wrote:

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour.

It's just the impact of supply and demand in the labour market. If you're an employer and someone from the EU is willing to do the job for less than what you might normally have to pay (and they are as capable of doing the job as other applicants), what would you do?

Not that straightforward though as having an extra person to spend money boosts aggregate demand.

Stevo_666

Alejandrosdog wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Cruff wrote:

The question about immigrants suppressing wages is a bullshit one. It isn't the immigrants driving wages down, its the employers exploiting the situation for gain. Anyone who can't see that is wilfully blind, or doesn't want (or is unable to grasp) the immutable concept of profitability at the expense of labour.

It's just the impact of supply and demand in the labour market. If you're an employer and someone from the EU is willing to do the job for less than what you might normally have to pay (and they are as capable of doing the job as other applicants), what would you do?

As an employer i treat all eu citizens including british as equal. I discriminate against all others in favour of eu citizens.

Once weve left i will reconsider this position

I just hire the best person for the job regardless of country of origin. Given the number of Aussies, Kiwis, Saffers, Japanese staff in our office, it isn't that difficult to hire them.